The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government announced the Blueprint for Arts and Culture and Creative Industries Development in the 2024-25 budget and officially promulgated it on Tuesday, which outlines four key directions: promoting Chinese culture, developing diverse creative industries, building an international platform for cultural exchanges, and refining the ecosystem for creative industries.

This blueprint holds significant importance as it encapsulates the city’s soft power. Enhancing Hong Kong’s soft power is of immense importance. China has witnessed a remarkable rise in its international competitiveness in recent years, attributed to its ability to effectively merge technology with cultural soft power.

Enhancing Hong Kong’s cultural soft power stands as a critical objective for the Blueprint for Arts and Culture and Creative Industries Development, necessitating the establishment of short-, medium-, and long-term goals. Key to this strategy is the concept of “industry”. In 2022, there were around 29,890 creative and cultural companies employing approximately 130,770 individuals, contributing HK$62.4 billion ($8 billion) in value, equivalent to about 2.3 percent of Hong Kong’s GDP.

The approach to industry development considers three main facets: first, fostering connections with cities within the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area and the whole Chinese mainland; second, engaging with countries along the Silk Road Economic Belt in alignment with China’s Belt and Road Initiative; and third, facilitating liaisons with European and American countries by attracting foreign enterprises to invest in Hong Kong’s cultural and creative industries (CCI). These endeavors emerge as the overarching goal of the blueprint.

Another key objective of the blueprint is to foster an industry ecology. That requires certain essential elements: land resources, talent, research mechanisms, technology, and market systems.

First, land. Hong Kong’s land use is predominantly characterized by three categories: residential, commercial and industrial. The blueprint could include the establishment of a cultural and creative industrial park, offering space where artists can gather to exchange ideas, innovate, and exhibit their work. Developers might incorporate creative and cultural elements into shopping malls and office buildings to unlock varied developmental avenues. It is imperative for the government to consider the needs of the CCI sector when allocating land resources.

Talent comes second. Talent constitutes a vital part of industry development. Since Hong Kong’s return to the motherland, the city has produced numerous research reports on arts education. Have the recommendations proposed by these reports been taken and implemented?

Looking ahead, will the Culture, Sports and Tourism Bureau (CSTB), the Education Bureau (EdB) or the Labour and Welfare Bureau take ownership of artistic talent? Given the diverse spectrum of artistic abilities, could the CSTB oversee the management of performing arts professionals, while the Vocational Training Council concentrates on arts tech talent, and the EdB focuses on grooming art administration and marketing talent? A clear delineation of responsibilities and the establishment of an effective system for professional artistic talent are much needed.

The mainland boasts a variety of professional arts institutions, including the Central Conservatory of Music, Beijing Film Academy, Shanghai Theatre Academy, Beijing Dance Academy, and various types of visual arts and performing arts academies. Cultivating a professional arts team requires platforms, space and impetus for growth.

At present, Hong Kong only houses the Academy for Performing Arts for grooming performing arts talent. Not a single independent and well-established film academy exists. Hong Kong cinema has extended its impact across the globe, influencing and inspiring Hollywood filmmakers. Given Hong Kong’s rich history in film production and the abundance of experience, why has the city yet to host a film academy of its own? In comparison, the mainland boasts the Beijing Film Academy, and the United States is home to the New York Film Academy. Hong Kong could as well venture to establish its own film academy.

Third, there is a need to establish a research mechanism and formulate strategies for cultural big data. Hong Kong now lacks a comprehensive method to manage all cultural big data. Existing data mainly comes from government statistics. The government could draw inspiration from the European Union and other developed countries, conducting censuses on a regular basis to maintain the relevance and accuracy of cultural big data. That would lay solid groundwork for shaping effective cultural policies.

Cultural big data plays a crucial role in assessing the sufficiency of cultural spaces. There are currently 83 public libraries, 15 museums, six art museums, and 23 performance venues in Hong Kong. The HKSAR government first set out the “10-year Development Blueprint for Arts and Cultural Facilities” in 2023, planning to increase the number of museums to 20, with an anticipated rise in annual visitors from 5 million to 8 million; while the total seating capacity of performance venues is set to increase from 30,000 to 45,000, with a projected increase in annual attendance, from 3 million to 4.5 million.

Following land, talent and research mechanisms, the next crucial element is technology.

At the moment, Shaw Studios in Tseung Kwan O stands as the sole provider in Hong Kong offering an all-encompassing package to film production, including studios, recording studios, and post-production facilities. This raises concerns about the sufficiency of hardware infrastructure within the industry. Developing another studio will not only introduce new film production technologies but also lower post-production costs. Hong Kong could diversify the types of studios to encourage innovation, taking reference from Hengdian World Studios in Hengdian, Zhejiang, which merges cultural tourism with film production.

Besides, Hong Kong harbors plenty of intellectual property (IP) ripe for development. By amalgamating Hong Kong’s IP with technology, culture, and tourism, a novel development approach can be forged, offering promising avenues for growth and innovation.

To advance the CCI, it is essential to establish benchmarks for evaluating industry performance. Hong Kong can glean insights from other regions to shape its creative and cultural strategies. For instance, Shanghai’s “50 Opinions on Accelerating the Innovative Development of the CCI in Shanghai” emphasizes eight key sectors: film and television, performing arts, animation and games, online culture, art trading, publishing, creative design, and cultural equipment.

The 10-year Development Blueprint for Arts and Cultural Facilities proposes renovation or expansion of public cultural facilities, upgrading hardware infrastructure; while the Blueprint for Arts and Culture and Creative Industries Development aims to enhance cultural soft power. Hong Kong, boasting a mix of Chinese and Western cultures, and given its international standing, owns great potential in developing its cultural and creative industries, which in turn could facilitate cultural exchanges between China and foreign nations, and eventually drive the city’s economic growth.

The author is a member of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong & Macao Studies and artistic director of Zuni Icosahedron.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.